Featured Topic

This is the topic we suggest you practice in the
Speaking Studio this week, but of course you can role
play or discuss any of the stories on our program.

Last Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the agency that regulates telecommunications in the United States, voted to repeal rules that ensure a fair and open internet. The reversal of these “net neutrality” regulations will make it possible for internet service providers to speed up service for certain websites, and block or slow downaccess to others.

The vote reverses a decision made in 2015 during the Obama administration to strengthen oversight of internet service companies. Net neutrality supporters say that this oversight is critical at a time when more Americans depend on the internet. But net neutrality opponents -- including internet service providers and FCC chairman Ajit Pai -- say that net neutrality discourages competition and innovation.

Following Thursday’s decision, internet service providers may be able to prioritize access to certain websites -- including ones that they own -- while making it harder for customers to use other ones. Critics of the decision also say that service providers could charge popular web services, like Netflix and Google, more to reach consumers, and that the costs could be passed onto consumers.

Joshua:

This was an absolutely terrible decision, Jessica! It completelygoes against the purpose of the internet: to allow everyone equal access to information.

Jessica:

I’m not sure that we should worry too much just yet. The biggest internet service companies, like AT&T and Comcast, have promised that customers won’t see changes in their service. If they try to block certain websites or slow them down, it could be bad publicity.

Joshua:

Do you really think these companies will regulate themselves, Jessica? How long will these companies be able to resisttaking advantage of the new law? When it comes to making money, I seriously doubt that these companies will turn the opportunity down.

Jessica:

Maybe you’re right. But things could change again.

Joshua:

Again?

Jessica:

Remember, the net neutrality rules were set just a couple of years ago. It’s possible that the rules could change again before too long.

Joshua:

I wouldn’t count on it.

Jessica:

The FCC’s decision has motivated people to fight. Some statesplan to file lawsuits against the FCC. And, of course, companies that could be hurt by this decision -- like Google, Facebook, and Netflix -- are trying to get the decision reversed.

Last week, the majority of Norway’s Parliament voted to decriminalize all drug use and focus on treatmentinstead. The vote does not automatically decriminalize illicit drugs -- rather, it directs the government to begin revising its current lawsrelated to drugs.

Under the proposed plan, people found with small amounts of marijuana, cocaine, and other illegal drugs could be sent to a treatment program, rather thanfined or imprisoned. The new rules would mimicthose in place in Portugal, which decriminalized drug use in 2001 and has since seen a decrease in habitual drug use and drug-related deaths. In 2006, Norway began testing a decriminalization program in Oslo and Bergen, through which drug users are sentenced to treatment. Last year, courts throughout the country were given the option to do this.

Supporters of the new approachargue that helping addictsrecover from addiction will reduce the likelihood that they will commit crimes. A report released in June by Europe’s drug addiction monitoring agency found there were more than 48,000 drug law offenses and 266 drug overdoses in Norway in 2014, the most recent figures available.

Joshua:

It’s refreshing to see this practical approach to a serious problem. Treating addiction is a much more realistic solution than sending addicts to jail!

Jessica:

For addicts, yes… but what about people who experiment with drugs? Wouldn’t decriminalization send a message that taking drugs is no big deal?

Joshua:

The parliament didn’t vote to legalize drugs, Jessica -- they’re just changing the way the legal system handles people who are caught with drugs. This new way soundsfar more sensible.

Jessica:

But is there any real difference between legalizing drugs and not treating drug use as a criminal offense? If people aren’t punished for having drugs, it seems to me that they’ll be more likely to use them -- especially young people.

Joshua:

Once the law is finalized, I’m sure it will answer your questions. What’s important is that the country is trying to change its view on addiction. Look at Portugal, and how many lives its drug policies have saved! Deaths from drugs dropped from 80 in 2001 to 16 in 2012. And HIV rates among drug users decreased by an even larger amount.

Jessica:

On the other hand, after Portugal decriminalized drugs, the number of people who had used drugs at any time in their lives went up.

Joshua:

But there are statistics that show the opposite is true. For instance, after marijuana was legalized in Colorado, the number of teenagers using it actuallyfell. But that’s beside the point -- which is that sending drug users to jail doesn’t really work. Common-sense laws and good social services are the right answer.

Last Thursday, NASA scientists announced the existence of a solar system with eight planets, the same number as our own solar system. The Kepler-90 system is more than 2,500 light-yearsaway. It ties our own solar system for having the highest number of known planets.

Scientists had already known about seven planets orbiting the Kepler-90 star. The discovery of the eighth planet was made with the help of artificial intelligencedeveloped by Google. Google software engineerscreated a “neural network,” a type of machine-learning technique, to analyze data collected by the Kepler space telescope. There was too much of this data for humans to examine on their own.

The Kepler-90 system is like oursin that it includes smaller, rocky planets closer to its sun and larger, gaseous planets farther away. Yet scientists believe that the eight planets are too warm to hostextraterrestrial life. The Kepler-90 star is about 20 percent bigger and 5 percent warmer than our sun, and all of its planets orbit the star more closely than the Earth orbits the sun.

Joshua:

Jessica, the most interesting part of this discovery isn’t that there’s another solar system with the same number of planets as ours.

Jessica:

No?

Joshua:

No -- the most interesting part is that without artificial intelligence, the new planet wouldn’t have been discovered.

Jessica:

Wouldn’t have been discovered? How do you know that? The scientists had the data from the telescope, so they might have found it at some point...

Joshua:

But, they might not have even looked at that data -- it wasn’t considered to be as promising as other data they had looked through. Plus, there was so much data that it would have taken the scientists a VERY long time.

Jessica:

OK, so artificial intelligence makes it easier to find new planets. But what about finding life? Isn’t that the real goal?

Joshua:

Yes... but first, scientists need to find planets with conditions that make them capable of hosting life. The discovery last Thursday shows that artificial intelligence can make that process a whole lot faster.

On December 7th, the Neapolitan technique of pizza twirling was added to the UNESCO’s “intangible heritage” list, which aims to raise awareness of traditionsaround the world. The practice, called “pizzaiuolo,” was one of 33 traditions added to the list this year; also among them were German organ craftsmanship and a style of Serbian folk dance.

The practice of pizzaiuolo has been handed down for generations, and includes songs and stories that turn pizza-making into a social ritual. UNESCO’s decision to add the practice to its list followed years of lobbying, and around 2 million people signed a petition to have the practice added to the list. The day the honor was announced, Neapolitan pizza makers handed out free pizza in the streets.

The intangible heritage list was created in 2003 and now includes more than 350 traditions and art forms. Other food-related traditions include Turkish coffee culture, the gingerbread craft of northern Croatia, and the Mediterranean diet.

Joshua:

I love pizza, Jessica -- it’s one of the greatest foods ever invented! But what’s the point of having pizza making on this list? What’s the purpose?

Jessica:

The list is meant to honor traditions around the world -- especially ones with a long history. “Pizzaiuolo” goes back centuries. And it’s just as much a social custom as it is about making pizza.

Joshua:

But why have it on this list? Is it endangered? Does it need to be protected?

Jessica:

Not necessarily, Joshua. But, some of the traditions on the list do. For example, one of them is a whistled language in Turkey, which is in danger of dying out.

Joshua:

So… how does being on the list actually help?

Jessica:

In some cases, UNESCO might start programs to get young people interested in a tradition, so that it continues. Or they might give funding to governments to protect certain customs.

Jessica, don’t you miss the time when the United States was bipartisan, a leader in global thinking and free trade, and the biggestenforcer of the liberal order in the world, instead of promoting isolationism and “America first?”

Jessica:

Yeah, it’s a shame that isolationism and populism are on the rise and, unfortunately, it’s not just in the United States. The “liberal order,” meaning countries that subscribe to a free, democratic system, is under the most horriblepressurefrom the inside and out. The world seems to have forgotten what made it prosperous and peacefulin the first place.

Joshua:

Exactly! And that prosperity for one nation means prosperity for all. Remember, for instance, when President Truman helped save Berlin with the airlift?

Jessica:

The airlift by American and British forces to supply Berlin, is one of the most uplifting stories I have ever heard. In 1948, Berlin was in the worstpossible situation after the end of WWII.

Joshua:

After the war Germany was divided into 4 parts. The sectors of the western allies formed West Germany, and the Soviet sector became communist East Germany. Berlin, likewise, was divided into West Berlin and East Berlin.

Jessica:

West Berlin’s biggest problem was that it was an islanddeep in the Russian sector, located about 100 miles away from the rest of West Germany. It was essentially the most helpless and most isolatedoutpost of the West, deep in the most hostile territory.

Joshua:

On June 24th,1948, the Soviet Union started the strictestblockade of West Berlin. All goods were blocked from entering the city, no people were allowed to leave and the electricity for West Berlin was cut off. It was the start of one of the firstmajor crises of the Cold War.

Jessica:

To make a long story short, the intent was to starve out West Berlin. At the time of the blockade, West Berlin had enough food for about 35 days and enough coal for about 45 days. Its very survival as a free city was at stake!

Joshua:

President Truman decided to work with the British to supply Berlin by air, which most people at the time thought could not be done. But once the airlift began, planes were landing at Tempelhof Airport every three minutes.

Jessica:

Yes, they maintained the strictest possible time table. The Soviets were helpless to stop these flights. Shooting one down would have been an act of war. Two million tons of food, fuel and other supplies were flown into the city by the bravest pilots.

Joshua:

This changed our relationship with Berliners. We were no longer seen as occupiers of the city. The inhabitants began to see us as friends. The airlift cost $224 million, which would be billions today, but there is no question that the rescue of West Berlin was well worth the cost.

Jessica:

There was another cost we must not forget: 101 pilots gave their lives. They were the firstvictims of the Cold War, which would last decades. But nobody can argue that the fight for the liberal order, against communism, didn’t pay off big time for the United States.

Joshua:

Yeah, if only people today looked more at history books, they might learn that “America First” is definitely not the best way to go if we want to live in a stable world.

Superlatives are adjectives that describe a noun which is the highest or most of something, such as the smartest, the most interesting, the best. They are used in sentences where a subject is compared to a group of the same noun. Whenever we use a superlative, it generally follows the following formula: Subject + verb + the + superlative adjective + object.

Nathan received the highest grades in the class.

This deli serves the most delicious sandwiches in the city.

I. One-Syllable Adjectives

To create a superlative for a single-syllable adjective, we add -est to the end of the adjective, or -st if the adjective already ends in ‘e’.

My school is the largest in the city.

Sarah is the smartest student in the school.

If the adjective ends with a consonant-vowel-consonant, such as big or sad, then the last consonant is usually doubled when forming a superlative.

Her family’s house is the biggest on the block.

That film is the saddest movie I have seen.

II. Two-Syllable Adjectives

To form the superlative for adjectives with three or more syllables, simply add ‘most’ immediately before the adjective.

Her golden retriever is the most peaceful dog I’ve ever met.

My father is the most careful driver I know.

However, two-syllable adjectives ending in ‘y’ are formed differently. Instead, drop the ‘y’ and add -iest.

I think Jerry Seinfeld is the funniest comedian.

O’Hare is the busiest airport in the Midwest.

III. Adjectives with Three or More Syllables

To form the superlative for adjectives with three or more syllables, simply add ‘most’ immediately before the adjective.

Shaun bought the most expensive car at the dealership.

Choosing where to go to college was the most important decision of her life.

IV. Irregular Superlatives

Some adjectives do not follow the above rules and have irregular superlative forms.

Yes, our, as in the American obsession with pets! Worldwide, the US ranks #1 for both dog and cat ownership. There are over 70,000,000 pet dogs and I am sure the number of pet cats is even bigger! We spend about $65 billion on our “furry friends” each year.

Jessica:

It doesn't really surprise me – we love our pets!

Joshua:

You’re not surprised? OK, what about these statistics? 27% of pet owners have had a professional photograph taken of their furry friends; 36% buy their dog birthday presents; 50% admit they talk to their pets. The pet products industry has even come up with a term for that: the humanization of pets.

Jessica:

Still not surprised! Just look at social mediathese days! I’m sure it’s playing a big role in the humanization of pets. There’s no better way to show off your matching manicures and designer outfits. I read somewhere that dog owners post a picture or talk about their canine companions six times per week. In 2016, one in six pet owners had created a social media account – Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube – specifically for their pet.

Joshua:

Technology is certainlydriving this trend!

Jessica:

So what other shocking discoveriesled you to say that things have gotten out of handwhen it comes to pets?

Joshua:

There are so many! According to a 2014 study by Wakefield Research, 76% of young Americans say that they would rather spend money on their pets than on themselves. 44% of them would buy expensive, gourmet treats. 38% would buy a custom bed that costs an arm and a leg!

Jessica:

A custom-made bed?

Joshua:

Yep! By comparison, only 50% of Baby Boomers – people born between 1946 and 1964 – said they would spend more on their pets than themselves.

Jessica:

So pet ownership and spending in the US is growing, especially among younger people?

Joshua:

Three-fourths of Americans in their 30s have dogs, while 51% have cats. Compare that to the overall US population, where 50% own dogs, and 35% own cats. The numbers don’t lie!

Jessica:

OK, enough numbers. You’ve convinced me – things are getting out of hand. Now tell me, how do you explain this phenomenon?

Joshua:

Well, first, retired people are living longer, healthier lives, which makes them more likely to get a pet.

Jessica:

That’s true!

Joshua:

Second, and most important, are young people. Millennials are half as likely to get married or live with a partner than Americans were 50 years ago. They are also delaying parenthood and demandingflexible work arrangements, which means they often work from home. All of these factors lead to higher rates of pet ownership.

Jessica:

So, your point is that younger Americans are getting more pets because...?

Joshua:

Love!

Jessica:

A-ha!

Joshua:

Do you know how the dictionary defines “pet?”

Jessica:

Let me look that up... Pet: a domestic or tamed animal kept for companionship or pleasure.

Joshua:

“Companionship or pleasure!” If you ask the most obsessive pet owners why they are so attached to their animals, I bet you many of them will say their pet gives them more love than any person could. More than a spouse, a sibling, or even parents.

Jessica:

Now that’s getting out of hand!

Joshua:

Well, it is true that a dog will love you just the way you are.

Jessica:

Hmm… So in the era of online dating, Millennials are buying pets because they want true, unconditional love?

Joshua:

Yes! After all, “all you need is love! Love is all you need!”

We have all been in a situation where you make a sensible plan to get something done, but then when the time comes, circumstanceshave a way of changing our plans. We lose control of the situation and the end result is overall more complicated, expensive, and far less sensible. When we let circumstances and improvisation lead us down a path of excess, we can rightfully say that things got out of hand.

Here is another very simple way to think about this expression. If you say that something is out of hand, it means that it is out of control.

This leads us to the origin of the phrase. Out of hand is a reference to horses and reins. A well known hazard of riding horses or carriages is that the failure to maintain a firm grip on the reins could result in an out of control horse. That “horse out of hand” becomes the metaphor for any situation that gets away from the person in charge and results in unintended and often wild results.

Example 1:

My roommate asked me if his girlfriend could spend the night “every once in a while,” and I agreed. But now she’s been here every night for over a month and her stuff is everywhere! This has really gotten out of hand.

Example 2:

My daughter wanted a piñata at her birthday party. We hung it up in a tree and let the kids have fun trying to break it open with a stick. Of course, there were several adults there to supervise. It’s the kind of game that can quickly get out of hand!

Example 3 (Incorrect use):

I was walking next to the swimming pool and my brand new smartphone got out of hand and landed in the water. I was so upset!

Let's practice pronunciation on few short phrases from today's episode.
Listen carefully how the native speaker pronounces each sentence.
Follow the intonations in each sentence. When you are ready, record one
paragraph at a time with your own voice and then compare
your pronunciation and intonations to the native speaker's: